“The Decision of Dordt: ONE TRUTH,” is a composition arranged and created by Dr. Matthew McMahon. This unique musical work utilizes a diverse array of musical genres, including rap, pop, country, techno, heavy metal, and others, to teach the content of the Canons of the Synod of Dordt, later to be known as T.U.L.I.P.
The Canons unfold deep theological concepts across five heads of doctrine that battled against Arminianism, (really the resurrection of Pelagian doctrine). The Canons were not just “any tract;” they were and are the foundation of theological doctrine describing the work of Jesus Christ and the manner in which he saves by his atonement.
To make it a little easier and more memorable to understand, Dr. McMahon has penned a series of songs taken out of Dordt’s conclusions in the canons. This is a look back to 1618, where holy minds met at the Synod of Dordt to lay down the foundational truths that still guide the people of God to the glory of Christ. Dr. McMahon has taken and composed songs with lyrics drawn directly from this historic confession. All the tracks in this set are crafted straight from the Canons of Dordt.
There are 24 tracks. 12 songs and 12 narrations that explain the work of Dordt by the MC. (See the video for a further explanation of "narration" and examples of the songs and lyrics.)
Respectfully, I think you ought to move away from AI and work with real people to make this kind of stuff, especially the narrator and visuals. I think it is great that you are utilizing music and technology for didactic purposes, but I also think there is something to be said about Christians pursuing excellence in art, and the human quality and touch that an AI program simply can’t reproduce.
Respectfully, I think you ought to move away from AI and work with real people to make this kind of stuff, especially the narrator and visuals. I think it is great that you are utilizing music and technology for didactic purposes, but I also think there is something to be said about Christians pursuing excellence in art, and the human quality and touch that an AI program simply can’t reproduce.
On the surface this may seem like a positive suggestion, but we also have to consider some things.
1. AI has only been available to the public in these type of forms for less than 4 years. It is only going to get better.
2. There are costs producing music and audio works, which many times far exceeds the ability of not only personal workers, but entire ministries. For instance, take the Spurgeon Sermons. Not a single ministry, in all its wealth, ever attempted to pay to have all 3,500 or so sermons dictated. So it took a volunteer, contributing countless personal hours, and he was able to do around 500 sermons in 30 years. Yet, Sermon Audio, utilizing AI, was able to do 3,000 sermons in 6 months. And that at the fraction of the cost it would have taken to do so utilizing human talent, while producing a similar quality.
3. What Dr. McMahon is doing now, he very well may look back on in 5-10 years, with the then available tech, and not like the quality anymore; but what he will have, given his involvement in its tech since the beginning, is a huge leg-up on everybody else, because everybody else simply wanted to humbug about the tech; which is not going anywhere, while he chose to instead use it for the glory of God immediately.
I will be as nice I can be, but sometimes what it sounds like is what the kids are calling a "boomer" mentality, that is, "back in my day" folks. What we have to realize is those days are no longer here. Excellence doesnt just have to do with subjective definitions of such, but it can also do with excelling at what is available. What Dr. McMahon has done with this music, may not be for everybody genre wise, but he is excelling at his work; and if you asked 1,000 Christians this moment to do what he did, possibly including yourself, they would have no idea where to start.
The truth is, AI, as it grows, is going to change the way things are done across the board. It is going to make numerous former ways of doing things irrelevant. It is just something we have to accept. If Christians are not going to use it, rest assure the world will. And I for one am happy people like Dr. McMahon are becoming experts in it while also being on "our side."
If we are going to confine audio works within a paradigm of preconceived notions of excellence; where do we start, and what are the banks? Does it just have to be human? Or does it have to sound good? Does it both have to be human and sound good? And if so what about many church choirs who would then be disqualified because though they are worshipping in the right spirit, they dont particularly sound good or "professional"? In those cases we see then that it is the heart of worship that exceeds the sound of music in how both beauty and excellence is defined.
People say there are some things that cant be "reproduced" by AI. But what we are witnessing is a tech in its infancy, still learning how to crawl. I dont think the apprehension stems so much from people thinking there are things it cant reproduce, but instead, seeing what it is currently capable of, while just coming out, understanding in a very short amount of time there are going to be very few things in many sectors that it will not be able to do just as good, or even better than humans; but at a fraction of the cost.
We dont really have to fear it though, because there are people on our side like Dr. McMahon who are not running from it, but are understanding it is here; and instead of just criticizing it, are learning how to bend it, mold it, and shape it to the will of God and the proliferation of his glory.
I can imagine many of the scribes had the same complaints when the press came out. The disgust for the lack of artisan quality. Yet how many scrolls do you roll out a day? As the Lord tarries, time marches on, and so does the tech. And people will either get on board, or get left behind. Its just the way it is.
On the surface this may seem like a positive suggestion, but we also have to consider some things.
1. AI has only been available to the public in these type of forms for less than 4 years. It is only going to get better.
2. There are costs producing music and audio works, which many times far exceeds the ability of not only personal workers, but entire ministries. For instance, take the Spurgeon Sermons. Not a single ministry, in all its wealth, ever attempted to pay to have all 3,500 or so sermons dictated. So it took a volunteer, contributing countless personal hours, and he was able to do around 500 in 30 years. Yet, Sermon Audio, utilizing AI, was able to do 3,000 in 6 months. And that at the fraction of the cost it would have taken to do so utilizing human talent, while producing a similar quality.
3. What Dr. McMahon is doing now, he very well may look back on in 5-10 years, with the then available tech, and not like the quality anymore; but what he will have, given his involvement in its tech since the beginning, is a huge leg-up on everybody else, because everybody else simply wanted to humbug about the tech; which is not going anywhere, while he chose to instead use it for the glory of God immediately.
I will be as nice I can be, but sometimes what it sounds like is what the kids are calling a "boomer" mentality, that is, "back in my day" folks. What we have to realize is those days are no longer here. Excellence doesnt just have to do with subjective definitions of such, but it can also do with excelling at what is available. What Dr. McMahon has done with this music, may not be for everybody genre wise, but he is excelling at his work; and if you asked 1,000 Christians this moment to do what he did, possibly including yourself, you would have no idea where to start.
The truth is, AI, as it grows, is going to change the way things are done across the board. It is going to make numerous former ways of doing things irrelevant. It is just something we have to accept. If Christians are not going to use it, rest assure the world will. And I for one am happy people like Dr. McMahon are becoming experts in it while also being on "our side."
If we are going to confine audio works within a paradigm of preconceived notions of excellence; where do we start, and what are the banks? Does it just have to be human? Or does it have to sound good? Does it both have to be human and sound good? And if so what about many church choirs who would then be disqualified because though they are worshipping in the right spirit, they dont particularly sound good or "professional"? In those cases we see then that it is the heart of worship that exceeds the sound of music in how both beauty and excellence is defined.
People say there are somethings that cant be "reproduced" by AI. But what we are witnessing is a tech in its infancy, still learning how to crawl. I dont think the apprehension stems so much from people thinking there are things it cant reproduce, but instead, seeing what it is currently capable of, while just coming out, understanding in a very short amount of time there are going to be very few things in many sectors that it will not be able to do just as good, or even better than humans; but at a fraction of the cost.
We dont really have to fear it though, because there are people on our side like Dr. McMahon who are not running from it, but are understanding it is here; and instead of just criticizing it, is learning how to bend it, mold it, and shape it to the will of God and the proliferation of his glory.
I can imagine many of the scribes had the same complaints when the press came out. The disgust for the lack of artisan quality. Yet how many scrolls do you roll out a day? As the Lord tarries, time marches on, and so does the tech. And people will either get on board, or get left behind. Its just the way it is.
And to add two more insights, having dealt with the rise of "AI" for the last year and a half, 1) I can tell you that all this is 100% in its infancy. Quality is rising every day. And yet, month to month, in some cases, week to week or day to day, improvements (because of competition) are flying out. Various companies all "updated" things at the same time last week, which, actually, were REALLY helpful to me. Competition in this area breeds lots of updates. And it makes work easier. That doesn't squelch creative need, it just directs it much more efficiently. Which leads to #2...
2. And as a side note, say, on puritan books, book covers to be specific, updates to some of the major creator apps for images just gave us the ability to not only create slamming book covers, (inventive, artistic, amazing, whatever we can think up, etc.) but they just added a brand new model to the group which allows a complete cover, with text written correctly, i.e. spelled out correctly, which came out on Friday. Over the last year I'd want to create a book cover, and have a "more flowing text" script or font that doesn't exist, or something that might be interlaced which is really hard from scratch. But these models just wouldn't generate things well enough. So my second point is, to create something from scratch (a book cover) takes A LOT of time and can cost you a lot with expensive software. Now I can create it the way I want in like, minutes. I know how to do the former, but the latter is WAY more time efficient. And I would rather be proofing a new book than busy work.
